His presence gives the Republicans standing to claim (however falsely) that they're the party of working people.

I get the argument, but it seems to me that the RNC took advantage of him much more than the other way around.

Seems like a pretty clear trend line, though~

Capitalists who need a new generation of workers to exploit.

Stupid headline.

The GOP was already throwing everyrhing they had at her, racism and misogyny.

If they had any other criticism to level at her they'd have deployed it already.

Total Harshit move.

You can have more than one dumb pipe to push bits through, but if the ISP can read your network traffic then you have bigger problems than a single-point-of-failure.

My man he is not a progressive

Correct. Your idea of a "progressive" is my idea of a "moderate centrist".

Zero progressives I know IRL have any kind of idea like that Biden is mediocre implies it’s okay if Trump comes to power

I don't think it's "okay", I think it's inevitable. The DNC would rather lose to the Republicans than lose their campaign financiers (who also sponsor Republicans).

I wonder if I look back in their history, I will see lots of advocacy for marijuana reform or criminal justice or better foreign policy in Central / South America… or anything other than left wing causes that can be tied directly in immediate and lazy fashion back to Biden (economy, immigration, Gaza)

Not sure what kind of point youre trying to make here, all of the above are important issues and I've talked about them extensively on this and prior social media accounts. I'd have to dig into my dead Twitter account for receipts but I predicted the lack of enthusiasm for the "safe" incumbent Democrat causing Trump to win this year's election all the way back in 2015 when the DNC decided that knocking Bernie off the ballot was more important than holding a democratic primary that was actually democratic. That the Dems would have to switch if they wanted to win has been as obvious as the fact that the incumbent won't stand down unless forced to, an extremely unlikely proposition.

Yes.

They expected companies not to make badly-designed not-phones that depend entirely on internet services, most of which will undoubtedly be shuttered by the end of the year.

If you have root, then AdAway: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.adaway/

Nah, we just prefer the one true Linux mascot.

A "side-channel attack" is one where fundamental flaws in the encryption implementation method are targeted, as opposed to flaws in the cryptographic algorithm itself.

By means of analogy, if your cryptographic method is to go to a locked room to have a private conversation, then a spy doesn't have to pick the lock if they can still hear you through the door. The locked-room security method itself isn't flawed, but implementing it without a soundproof door has much the same result.

In this case:

The threat resides in the chips’ data memory-dependent prefetcher, a hardware optimization that predicts the memory addresses of data that running code is likely to access in the near future. By loading the contents into the CPU cache before it’s actually needed, the DMP, as the feature is abbreviated, reduces latency between the main memory and the CPU, a common bottleneck in modern computing. DMPs are a relatively new phenomenon found only in M-series chips and Intel's 13th-generation Raptor Lake microarchitecture, although older forms of prefetchers have been common for years.

Security experts have long known that classical prefetchers open a side channel that malicious processes can probe to obtain secret key material from cryptographic operations. This vulnerability is the result of the prefetchers making predictions based on previous access patterns, which can create changes in state that attackers can exploit to leak information.

So, the encryption the chips use is solid, but some of the hardware employed can still leak data.

That graph shows real wages as being flat for the last 24 years, and even the bump you mentioned was barely noticable and fell back to baseline in like a year.

What would the chart look like when we exclude billionaires, C-suite executives, and everyone else who gets paid to own stuff instead of working for a living?